Everybody thanks for the reply.
We gonne use the 8 till 14 range. I think with our leadingedge fuel thanks this
should not a problem.
Then result of the weight mesurment is 198 kg without engine. But we
calculaties the pant and filter in it. All the instrument And seatbelts radio's
enz enz.
I think we can be happy with this result.
Now the calculations can be started. I can use the sheet of the kr net. ( with
my own dimension)
Thanks
Stef
--
Steph and his dad are building the KR-2S see
http://www.masttotaalconcept.nl/kr2
>Origineel Bericht
>Van : krnet at list.krnet.org
>Datum : 20/08/2015 01:27
>Aan : krnet at list.krnet.org
>Cc : john_martindale at bigpond.com
>Onderwerp : Re: KR> weight and balance
>
>Hi Sid
>
>It is not that the centre of lift for the RAF48 wing has been inaccurately
>mapped. That would have been well calculated by the wing designers (not Stu
>Robinson) and has little or nothing to do with the aircraft it is put on.
>Rather the issue is that the CoG envelope for the KR2 was set too broadly
>and perhaps somewhat arbitrarily at 8" to 16".
>
>We know that flight in the rear 2" or so has whiskers on it and in fact in
>Australia in the early days the authorities downright banned it.
>
>However, this does not mean that the forward limit at 8" is also incorrect.
>I think reducing it to 6" may be ill advised without proper analysis and you
>may find difficulty in raising the nose at low airspeeds such as in the
>flare.
>
>As I have explained previously you cannot simply equate Centre of Lift with
>Centre of Gravity because the balance is the outcome of four vectors, the
>other two being thrust and drag. Further, the CoL varies with Angle of
>Attack and at the stall moves backwards lending support to a nose down
>tendency that aids in recovery. If the CoL is actually 2" further forward as
>you claim then this design aspect would be compromised.
>
>I suspect the problem with your aircraft is not the CoL but the fact that it
>was tail heavy and too far back in the envelope as you have correctly
>addressed. It is not necessarily to do with an inaccurate mapping of the
>CoL. Please do not blame the designer for what is essentially a construction
>error. There are many KR2s flying without a problem and have been for years.
>
>
>Cheers John
>
>John Martindale
>29 Jane Circuit
>Toormina NSW 2452
>Australia
>
>ph:61 2 6658 4767
>m:0403 432179
>email:john_martindale at bigpond.com
>web site:
>
>-Original Message-
>From: KRnet [mailto:krnet-bounces at list.krnet.org] On Behalf Of Sid Wood via
>KRnet
>Sent: Wednesday, 19 August 2015 5:54 AM
>To: krnet at list.krnet.org
>Cc: Sid Wood
>Subject: Re: KR> weight and balance
>
>The KR-2 Plans have a serious error regarding Weight & Balance. The
>designer, Stu Robinson, chose the RAF48 Center
>of Lift 2 inches to far forward..snip
>
>
>
>-
>No virus found in this message.
>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>Version: 2015.0.6125 / Virus Database: 4401/10469 - Release Date: 08/19/15
>
>
>___
>Search the KRnet Archives at http://tugantek.com/archmailv2-kr/search.
>To UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave at list.krnet.org
>please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html
>see http://list.krnet.org/mailman/listinfo/krnet_list.krnet.org to change
>options
>
